I don't think any of that has anything to do with metagaming. Treasure = XP is a proxy for Goal Achievement = XP, in a game that assumes the goal of the PCs is to gain treasure. It counts as experience all of the things that you do in order to achieve that goal that are not measurable under 1e. The mechanic encourages players to have the same goals as their characters. That is not metagaming.XP by the (1E) book:
Monster XP - DM divides monster XP however they choose; the book advises equally
Magic Item XP - goes to the character obtaining ownership of the item
Gold XP (including gold from selling items not kept) - the players determine how money is split, and XP is given for the gold as split to each character
Challenge Factor: all of the above presumes a challenging environment. If a group of 10th level characters decide to slum on level 1 of a dungeon, the DM is within their rights to reduce the XP by a % they deem fit. In practicality, most players want to get bigger hoards and so manage their challenge rating just fine. I've not had to do this. But if there's a group of timid players this is a way to address an appetite for pushovers. But I wouldn't use it unless it's clear the players are purposefully trying to avoid any meaningful risk.
How I do it varies in one small detail; consumables (scrolls, potions) don't give XP for merely packing it around, you have to use it and then I give the person using it XP on the spot. But if you packed it around and lost it to a fireball, you got zilch. Figure out a way to use it that helps move the game along so I can hand out more magic items, please.
I'm all for XP for magic items. Low levels are fun for newbs. I advise players to sell more magic items at low level to advance faster, and also to strategically divide the money so that characters near to next levels gain them before everyone leaves on the next heist; er, I mean quest. It doesn't do the party any good to equally divide gold XP and have 1 character level instead of 3. 3 characters leveling means more people likely survive the next adventure and have more power on it, and everyone gets more gold XP the next time.
Yes, this is an example of how 1E encourages metagaming. And I think the game is better for it.
You are right, that could be metagaming, although I could also think of various in-game justifications for it depending on the split, especially if you use the training rules. If the PCs are levelling because of training, having extra cash to pay training costs is a reasonable proxy.Most people I know would say dividing treasure based on who would level as a result, instead of equally or based on what characters did in the adventure it was earned, is metagaming. If others don't feel it is, that's fine too. But I can't carry that definition outside of this conversation because I'd had way too many people declare it was. So I'm happy to simply own the label.
The perfect description of the type of character that become the norm following 2e.Just half-dragonborn/tiefling annihilator5/ranger1/ultraslayer44 charop all day. Aaaaaargh!
A recent video on this topic:Funnily enough, the book that I think provoked this dispute - the AD&D 1e DMG - is IMHO the one that it's hardest to make the case for being "obsolete" because so many of the appendices at the back remain useful even if you're not playing D&D, and are hard to obtain in a single volume outside of the AD&D 1e DMG.
Yes. As far as D&D and its variants go, my kids will be exposed to old school versions first (or nice retroclone at least); they can make their own decision to play other other games on their own. 3e and later are not D&D to me, they are just a house rules version put together by a corporation that have the D&D name on the front because WotC owns the IP. I’m sure they’re fun if they’re your sort of thing, but when I play a non-D&D fantasy game I would never choose these over anything like DCC. Aside from all the other cool things in DCC, it cements itself firmly in the collective ‘fantasy consciousness’ of Appendix N, is unmistakenly old school in its character creation process, character power levels and deadliness. A much, much better offering than 5e in my book.Even worse for those that wish AD&D would fade away --- us old folk are playing it with the next generation...so there's that too.
Best to continue the honesty.I have lost all stomach for fighting. EOTB is right, both here and in the parent thread, when he questions the point of criticising a system one doesn't personally need or play. Dangerous Puhson was (and is) carrying a torch for 5e, which is different, and is doing so surrounded by old-school gamers, which is pretty amazing. I think you guys are a merry, witty and gracious bunch.
I apologize for my attack on AD&D. It was uncalled for. The game obviously sings for some people and that is enough to give it relevance. When people are still using something as old as AD&D, I should assume there are good reasons (and maybe ask about them in the spirit of learning).
No lie, I would rather have a horse.(I'd rather have that Model-T instead of a horse, pretty please!)
Still pissy over that design contest, eh gandalf? You take shit way too personally, and these kind of sleights against me are getting pretty damned tactless.Best to continue the honesty.
"Dangerous Puhson was (and is) carrying a torch for 5e, which is different, and is doing so surrounded by old-school gamers, which is pretty amazing."
That's not accurate and he's not amazing. 5e already has a bonfire; it's far more popular than 1e. He's not carrying a torch. What he's doing is deliberately throwing fire crackers at a harmless OSR community to instigate the kind of arguments/fights you suddenly eschew. Nobody here hates 5e. Nobody here is trying to convert anybody from 5e. Nobody here is excluding DP. He, on the other hand, relentless attacks early editions because he enjoys instigating fights (online) where none need exist.
IIRC, the admonition was to find creative ways to separate PCs from their cash. I don't remember all of them, but training is expensive. 1000 to 4000 gp per character level, each time you level, no levelling up until you have trained, which takes 1-4 weeks. Its pretty easy to justify in 3e; how are they learning new feats or gaining class features if not from training? You could just make the cost of training be the difference between expected wealth by level, and what they are actually taking out of the dungeon, and be done with it.Slight segue here talking about the XP for GP thing:
I'm running Barrowmaze, modding it on the fly for our 3.5e characters. We're having a blast.
I told them that we'd be deriving XP from treasure and less of a % from monsters slain. So far that's been working out alright.
But here's the thing, these guys have been staggering back to town under the weight of these 1e-sized hoards (yes I'm being a stickler about encumbrance in this regard). They're 3rd-4th lvl PC's and they've got a fortune they could realistically expect to retire on. They are literally going to destroy the economy of the humble village of Helix. How the hell am I supposed to keep the PC's from tooling up with all the best equipment, buying property and generally pushing the local authorities around. I expect this crap at name-level, but not this early on!
Is there a 1e mechanic for bleeding PC's of their cash that I've forgotten?
Embrace it.They're 3rd-4th lvl PC's and they've got a fortune they could realistically expect to retire on. They are literally going to destroy the economy of the humble village of Helix. How the hell am I supposed to keep the PC's from tooling up with all the best equipment, buying property and generally pushing the local authorities around. I expect this crap at name-level, but not this early on!
Yes, training was a BIG deal and quite expensive. It was meant to be the big money drain. I didn't realize that until later.IIRC, the admonition was to find creative ways to separate PCs from their cash. I don't remember all of them, but training is expensive. 1000 to 4000 gp per character level, each time you level, no levelling up until you have trained, which takes 1-4 weeks. Its pretty easy to justify in 3e; how are they learning new feats or gaining class features if not from training? You could just make the cost of training be the difference between expected wealth by level, and what they are actually taking out of the dungeon, and be done with it.
You know, that is exactly the kind of thing I have in mind when I think about domain play.Here's a good blog post describing just letting it play out.
If Your Torches Burn for only One Hour your NPCs will be More Important
In the Seaward campaign the PCs formed an adventuring company, got a charter from the King, bought an old inn as a home base and, most rec...harbingergames.blogspot.com
Holy hell, I was like 'bla bla bla tl/dr' and then bam it all tied up in this beautiful little bow at the end! Nice link!Here's a good blog post describing just letting it play out.